I'm starting to change my stance on Matt Flynn. For the last several months, I've felt that having a good backup has a lot of value and shouldn't be discarded without much thought. Actually, I still feel that way, but I had a bit of a change of heart when I looked up Flynn's contract details at Spotrac today:

For comparison's sake, Flynn's cap hit this season was only $4 million.

Seattle only has an estimated $13.5 million this offseason and that's before signing back our own free agents, among them Jason Jones and Alan Branch. Seattle also needs to have money on hand in 2014 so that they can extend Kam Chancellor (RFA), Doug Baldwin (RFA), Walter Thurmond, and/or Brandon Browner (RFA). The RFA option will really help as a short term fix, but the idea is that you want to have enough money to sign them all long term, assuming they are still worth it in two year's time.

However, if Seattle outright trades Flynn, that cap number would jump to $20.75 million, and would give them the ammunition to sign their existing free agents and draft picks while still having room to spare to make a run at a big name free agent. It would also free up a ton of money in 2014, which begins a string of seasons in which the Seahawks will have to start paying big to keep their team intact.

While I like this year's options in the draft, the WR group in free agency has a chance to be the best in years (Wes Welker, Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, Victor Cruz (RFA), Dwayne Bowe, Danny Amendola, Danario Alexander (RFA) and Bryan Hartline). Some of those guys will be signed before hitting the market, but still, this has a chance to be as wide a field for available WRs as I've ever seen. Alexander could be a guy worth keeping an eye on if the Steelers get cute with his RFA tag- he's become an intriguing up and coming WR in recent weeks and could be a good low cost gamble.

There are some nice options on the D-line too. Henry Melton, Michael Bennett (remember him?), Randy Starks, any of them would be upgrades at DT and probably better than anyone in the draft for our 3-tech spot.

Problem is, to find the money for those players, Seattle would need to expend some contracts. Zach Miller is the most obvious option, but he's played well. Sidney Rice and Red Bryant are too valuable to risk approaching for a restructure. Really that leaves Matt Flynn, who's contract is a pain in 2013 and a problem in 2014.

And really, I think the FO designed Flynn's contract so that he'd have to earn most of his money by how he did in 2012. There is no way they signed him to be a $7-8 million a year backup for Russell Wilson.

So what value does Flynn have?

I think this question has missed the mark. It's not just about what teams will give us for Flynn, it's about what we can do with the money we'd save by trading him. If we released Flynn outright, that would probably give the team enough money to upgrade over Jason Jones with Randy Starks. That has a lot of value. The draft pick is just a bonus. And if the team trades him, they are off the hook for the $4 million remaining guaranteed money too, so it's even better.

The way the offseason is shaping up, I see 3 QBs that will likely get 1st round consideration this year, with about twice as many teams that could consider QB early (KC, OAK, AZ, JAX, BUF, NYJ). During the draft their will be a game of QB musical chairs, and when the music stops playing I suspect at least a few of those teams will make inquiries into Flynn. If Seattle gets anything in return, it's a win. If they get a 3rd or 4th round pick, it's a huge win. And frankly, I think Flynn is worth at least that much, just not to us as a backup.

Of course, if Flynn is traded than Seattle will need to find a low cost answer to replace him. Looking into the mid to late rounds of the draft could be an option (there are a couple players I think really fit JS well in that range). Pete has not shown hesitancy to start the year with an inexperienced backup, as he did in 2010 and 2011 with Whitehurst. He originally planned for Wilson to be the backup in 2012. So going into the draft for the next backup QB could be the most likely way this gets resolved.

But if Pete wants a veteran, there are options. Among them T-Jack, Vince Young, Tim Tebow (lol), Bruce Gradkowski, and- probably- Matt Hasselbeck (he'll probably be a contract casualty this offseason).

When I look at that and take it all in, then I remember how John Schneider has been so cold blooded with contracts, I think it's pretty likely that Matt Flynn will not be a Seahawk next season, and that the team will prosper from his departure- even though I truly believe he is a worthy starting QB in the National Football League.

Suppose we trade Matt Flynn, and hypothetically Matt Barkley is available to us in the 20s, do you think Seattle drafts him? I realize that this is highly unlikely due to all the QB hungry teams, and he doesn't fit well in our offensive scheme. But if Barkley drops, is he too good to pass up?

volsunghawk wrote:We did pick up Josh Johnson already, didn't we? Any thoughts on him moving up to the #2 spot and competing with a journeyman vet in 2013 for the backup role while Flynn moves on to a QB needy team?

We currently only have 2 QB's on the roster, including IR and PS. So no, Johnson is not with them. Besides, I'm not sure I'd call him a quality backup.

volsunghawk wrote:We did pick up Josh Johnson already, didn't we? Any thoughts on him moving up to the #2 spot and competing with a journeyman vet in 2013 for the backup role while Flynn moves on to a QB needy team?

Johnson just got signed by Cleveland and looks like he may be playing this weekend. McCoy and Weeden both have right shoulder injuries.

usChawks wrote:Suppose we trade Matt Flynn, and hypothetically Matt Barkley is available to us in the 20s, do you think Seattle drafts him? I realize that this is highly unlikely due to all the QB hungry teams, and he doesn't fit well in our offensive scheme. But if Barkley drops, is he too good to pass up?

usChawks wrote:Suppose we trade Matt Flynn, and hypothetically Matt Barkley is available to us in the 20s, do you think Seattle drafts him? I realize that this is highly unlikely due to all the QB hungry teams, and he doesn't fit well in our offensive scheme. But if Barkley drops, is he too good to pass up?

No. I like Barkley but USC QBs are not to be trusted to perform in the bigs. I am convinced USC gets these outstanding recruits, then maxs their potential before they get drafted way too high, ruining teams along the way. I think Barkley will drop out of the first and we'd have to move up in the 2nd to get him. Why? I'd sooner keep that pick(s) and Flynn.

I do hope Barkley breaks the cycle. I hope he is drafted somewhere where he can sit for a year or two before being thrown to the lions. SF might be a good place for him, actually.

I don't think Barkley escapes the top 5 picks. There are a lot of QB hungry teams and Barkley is still the #1 QB. I don't think scouts have forgotten Barkley's hot streak from the year before, just like they didn't for Ryan Tannehill after he slumped in his last season. Ditto Jake Locker. Ditto Christian Ponder.

kearly wrote:I don't think Barkley escapes the top 5 picks. There are a lot of QB hungry teams and Barkley is still the #1 QB. I don't think scouts have forgotten Barkley's hot streak from the year before, just like they didn't for Ryan Tannehill after he slumped in his last season. Ditto Jake Locker. Ditto Christian Ponder.

No question teams get trigger happy with QBs in April. We've made our share of such knee jerk mistakes. Urgh. But I think the word is out on USC QBs, I really do. Barkley, IMO, like those before him, has likely peaked already. I think both Geno and Wilson will go before him. I could be wrong, but if I were Barkley, no way do I go to NYC. No way. I think he will be sitting there looking the way Brady Quinn did. The cameras love that stuff. I couldn't wish it on anyone...not even a Trojan.

No. I like Barkley but USC QBs are not to be trusted to perform in the bigs. I am convinced USC gets these outstanding recruits, then maxs their potential before they get drafted way too high, ruining teams along the way. I think Barkley will drop out of the first and we'd have to move up in the 2nd to get him. Why? I'd sooner keep that pick(s) and Flynn.

Apart from Carson Palmer, who has had some success in the pros, history does point to USC QBs not meeting their hype. But also consider that PC was adamantly against Sanchez entering the draft. And PC has had nothing but high praise for Barkley, even comparing RW to him. And after reading this forum for the past couple of years or so, it seems that Barkley has some elite qualities to his game, unlike some of those names above.

Actually, here's a little story that may or may not mean anything. The USC film school had a screening of 'The League' in October that was free to USC students (with RSVP), and I wore a bright neon green Seahawks shirt. Matt Barkley was there with a couple of people, and he actually walked by and said 'nice shirt' to me. It did make me wonder, just for a little bit..

But this is all hypothetical, of course. I guess a 1st rounder is a steep price for a backup QB. Honestly, I just really really hope he doesn't get drafted by any NFC West teams besides the Seahawks.

Through no fault of Flynn's own, he was dealt a raw deal due to Wilson being so amazing. I'd like to see him traded to a team, and succeeding. I kind of feel bad for him. He might have led us to the same number of wins or possibly even more due to likely having a less painful early learning curve due to how much time he spent in the league, for all we know. He deserves a chance somewhere before he ages much more.

Why not trade Flynn? He has vaule still. Cards, Eagles, Bills, Vikings, Jags, Titains, Jets, and KC will all be looking to upgrade the QB postion. Most of thos teams are gonna be in talks with the Seahawks in the offseason. I believe a 2nd or 3rd isn't to much to ask for. Maybe some kinda package. Who knows. Matt Moore and Drew Stanton will be free agant along with Jason Campbell. All 3 would make good back ups. All 3 have starting exp. Have proven they can win. I'd like to see one of those back up RW3.

RolandDeschain wrote:Through no fault of Flynn's own, he was dealt a raw deal due to Wilson being so amazing. I'd like to see him traded to a team, and succeeding. I kind of feel bad for him. He might have led us to the same number of wins or possibly even more due to likely having a less painful early learning curve due to how much time he spent in the league, for all we know. He deserves a chance somewhere before he ages much more.

And for all we know he could've been the reincarnation of Kevin FitzCassellKolb and been entirely mediocre, as is the case with most backups turned starters.

I don't feel sorry for Flynn. He's making bank and having to do jack for it. What a tough break.

Lets trade him to the Cards in a 4 teams trade. We'll get Dockett, Peterson, Megatron, Even Moore and Stevie Johnson. The Cards get Flynn. The Lions & Bills will get a 6th. The Eagles will get back Even Moore and a Starbucks 50 dollars gift card.

I doubt that will play any factor whatsoever. Those players have nothing to do with Matt Barkley. I could buy that Pete Carroll made his QBs look better than they really were, but Lane Kiffin isn't exactly a master of inspiring over-achievement.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:I don't see who's going to jump for Flynn. There were three or four QB-desperate teams last March and none of them gave more than a half-hearted offer. He'll probably just get cut.

It really depends if anyone smart is looking. Flynn for a late round pick Flynn is a bargain, IMO. On tape I see a QB that could be a poor man's Matt Ryan. Give him a decent line and a few weapons and he will win games.

I also think that Flynn's market was killed by Peyton Mania and teams tapping the brakes because they thought Flynn would get a Kolb type contract. I would bet you there were more than a few teams that saw Flynn sign a $19 million contract and wished they had been in on it.

Last edited by kearly on Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

SeaTown81 wrote:And for all we know he could've been the reincarnation of Kevin FitzCassellKolb and been entirely mediocre, as is the case with most backups turned starters.

I don't feel sorry for Flynn. He's making bank and having to do jack for it. What a tough break.

Fans felt sorry for Charlie Whitehurst too.

Lol, way to hold "Well, he might have sucked" against him. I said he deserves a chance, not a damn NFL MVP award. Calm your beard.

I don't have a beard. How dare you.

I'm not saying he might have sucked. He most likely would've been mediocre. History is against him being some sort of crazy hidden gem as some want to suggest. And what we've seen from him in limited time suggests he looks closer to the rule than exception. Late round draft picks that spend the first half of their career on the bench rarely pan out as huge finds. They generally end up like a guy like Matt Cassell or Kevin Kolb. And I don't know how many teams are dying to give up draft picks for either right now.

The market used to be there for backups with nothing but untapped potential. But too many teams have got burned over recent years. Which was why the free agent market for Flynn was rather sparse. And conversely, too many teams are scoring BIG by drafting guys and playing them right away. 1/3 of the league is currently qb'ed by draft picks of the last couple seasons. Team's aren't watching Seattle, Washington, and Indy make the playoffs with rookie qb's, Cincy and Minnesota getting it done with 2nd year guys, and saying to themselves, "Maybe we'll try the route Arizona and Kansas City tried instead."

I'm not replying to you as much as I am the people who think there's some big market for the guy. There wasn't last year when team's didn't have to give up draft picks. Why would there suddenly be now?

No. I like Barkley but USC QBs are not to be trusted to perform in the bigs. I am convinced USC gets these outstanding recruits, then maxs their potential before they get drafted way too high, ruining teams along the way. I think Barkley will drop out of the first and we'd have to move up in the 2nd to get him. Why? I'd sooner keep that pick(s) and Flynn.

Apart from Carson Palmer, who has had some success in the pros, history does point to USC QBs not meeting their hype. But also consider that PC was adamantly against Sanchez entering the draft. And PC has had nothing but high praise for Barkley, even comparing RW to him. And after reading this forum for the past couple of years or so, it seems that Barkley has some elite qualities to his game, unlike some of those names above.

Actually, here's a little story that may or may not mean anything. The USC film school had a screening of 'The League' in October that was free to USC students (with RSVP), and I wore a bright neon green Seahawks shirt. Matt Barkley was there with a couple of people, and he actually walked by and said 'nice shirt' to me. It did make me wonder, just for a little bit..

But this is all hypothetical, of course. I guess a 1st rounder is a steep price for a backup QB. Honestly, I just really really hope he doesn't get drafted by any NFC West teams besides the Seahawks.

I admire your honesty re USC QBs. IMO, the last good one was very long ago. Rodney Pete, and he wasn't exactly a superstar. I thought Palmer was over-rated and to comment on Sanchez or Lienert would be rubbing salt into wounds. Who else? Rob Johnson was OK. Salisbury...no. Marinovich? All he "saw was purple". Sorry, had to do it. I know I'm missing a few but it's really incredible how few outstanding QBs have come from your outstanding program. I think it's a huge compliment to those that coached them to so many championships.

I think that's about to change. I've seen no more of this kid than any other outsider, but I sincerely believe Max Wittek is going to be the real deal. Huge arm, great size and can think on his feet. He couldn't ask for a worse, or better, situation than what he is about to have vs. ND. I am rooting for him as well as the Trojans. I am also hoping for good things to come Matt Barkley's way. I really do like the kid.

I love your break down of the of the cap implications. It makes total sense, the only thing I would disagree with would be the expandability of Miller. He does so many things for us in the run game that don't show up on the stat sheet. I would hate to see him leave. I think it would be a huge set back, not to mention he can catch the ball and run good routes and is turning out to be a good option for RW.be The other thing that worries me is the fact that Luck RG3 and our man RW have had success. I see other teams starting rookies right away and that hurts flynns trade value. It's going to be interesting to see what happens with flynn. I don't want to see us snag or over pay for any big time FA's when we're going to have to pay top coin to keep most of our guys come 2014.

When I get to the NFL, I'm gonna destroy the league, as soon as they give me the chance.' And that's what I've been doing ever since - Richard Sherman

Funny enough, I think there could be some real potential for an in division trade. Arizona is desperate at QB and might be picking too low to get one of the 3 first round QB options. SF will want to dump Alex Smith and Seattle will want to unload Flynn. I think both teams wouldn't mind dealing to Arizona, because although it would make Arizona a much better team, it would prevent them from being bad enough to get the next Luck/RG3 megastar in the draft for half a decade or more (unless they are smart enough to draft Johnny Manziel in the 3rd round of the 2016 draft, but if Arizona did something smart after the early rounds, it would be a first).

mikeak wrote:Are you allowed a trade that states 5th round pick but if he starts more than 6 games it turns into a 2nd rounder (or something like it)

Not only is this allowed, but it's very common. Hell, our own trade with the Bills for Beast Mode had a # of games started escalator, if I recall correctly.

The TJack trade had an escalator clause in it that upgraded the pick from a 7 to a 6 if he was merely active for 6 games this season. At the time everyone considered it to be a lock. Guess how many games he was active for this year? As many as you and I combined.

As for what mikeak is asking, you don't normally see conditional trades that escalate multiple rounds like from a 5th to a 2nd. I'm sure it's allowed. But it's typically only a difference of one round.

I don't really buy the argument that nobody would want Flynn because nobody wanted him last year. By my count, there are currently 7 teams that could use a new QB this offseason (and only 3 projected 1st round pick QBs). They are the Jets, Bills, Jaguars, Chiefs, Raiders, Vikings, and Cardinals. None of them were in the market for a QB last year (either due to financial commitments or having a rookie QB who needed more time to evaluate), so there's no way to know if they all would've passed on Flynn.

The teams that did need a new QB last year all got one. There were really only two other suitors for Flynn's services besides the Seahawks, and those were the Dolphins and Browns. And they both opted to draft a 1st round QB instead. Not every team this year can do that. I think there will be a market for him, and its not franchise-crippling to take on his contract for a 4th round pick. There will be desperate teams out there.

I think there's a good chance the Cardinals could have an even record or better next year if they grabbed Flynn and drafted two very good O-linemen. I'd jump on picking up Flynn for a 3rd-rounder as a Cardinals fan despite being burned by Kolb, IMO.

Erebus wrote:I don't really buy the argument that nobody would want Flynn because nobody wanted him last year. By my count, there are currently 7 teams that could use a new QB this offseason (and only 3 projected 1st round pick QBs). They are the Jets, Bills, Jaguars, Chiefs, Raiders, Vikings, and Cardinals. None of them were in the market for a QB last year (either due to financial commitments or having a rookie QB who needed more time to evaluate), so there's no way to know if they all would've passed on Flynn.

The teams that did need a new QB last year all got one. There were really only two other suitors for Flynn's services besides the Seahawks, and those were the Dolphins and Browns. And they both opted to draft a 1st round QB instead. Not every team this year can do that. I think there will be a market for him, and its not franchise-crippling to take on his contract for a 4th round pick. There will be desperate teams out there.

Agreed. Way different years, situations, draft class, etc. Everyone was eligible for the lottery with RG3 available for trade.

SeaTown81 wrote:The market used to be there for backups with nothing but untapped potential. But too many teams have got burned over recent years. Which was why the free agent market for Flynn was rather sparse. And conversely, too many teams are scoring BIG by drafting guys and playing them right away. 1/3 of the league is currently qb'ed by draft picks of the last couple seasons. Team's aren't watching Seattle, Washington, and Indy make the playoffs with rookie qb's, Cincy and Minnesota getting it done with 2nd year guys, and saying to themselves, "Maybe we'll try the route Arizona and Kansas City tried instead."

I'm not replying to you as much as I am the people who think there's some big market for the guy. There wasn't last year when team's didn't have to give up draft picks. Why would there suddenly be now?

As I said to someone else, it really depends if there is a smart team out there that doesn't have access to the top 3 QBs in the draft but still needs to address the position. In baseball, the smartest GMs have taken to the "moneyball" philosophy of observing league wide trends and exploiting market inefficiencies. Or to put it using a stock market cliche: You buy low, sell high.

The league is buying high on rookie QBs and selling low on backups right now. The instinct of any moneyball type GM right now should be to investigate options where no one else is looking, because there will be no bidding war to drive up the price.

Or to put it in a very direct way: we have probably the smartest front office in the entire NFL, and guess who it was that signed Matt Flynn in the first place despite not even wanting him that much at the beginning of FA? They did it because they realized that Flynn's price was dropping as a result of being a market inefficiency. If Flynn were starting this season and playing on par with expectations, I think a lot of people would be amazed with how smart Seattle was for getting a solid league average QB (or better) at such low cost.

I agree with you that the recent success of young QBs will further emphasize the draft as a solution. Only problem is, after the top 3 QBs are gone you are looking at a QB class that has very little left (unless you are willing to overlook size issues (Aaron Murray, Matt Scott), which only a handful of GMs will). Despite the lack of options, the perception of the draft being a good source for a QB will turn 5th round QBs into 3rd round QBs, and 4th round QBs into 2nd rounders. What seems smarter, paying a 2nd round pick for a rookie Landry Jones or Tyler Bray, neither of which will likely be any good, or paying a 7th round pick and some cash for an established veteran nuanced in the west coast offense who has played very well at times?

If I was starting the NFL's 33rd franchise as GM that would be the very first call I'd make, just like how Holmgren called Green Bay for Hasselbeck and got a franchise QB for pennies on the dollar. I won't put Flynn on that high of a pedestal, but when he wasn't checking down and wasn't having passes dropped, he looked like a franchise QB in the preseason and he's acquitted himself well in the few regular season games he's played too.

And it's not like Flynn has to be your franchise. He isn't signed to a 6/60 contract like Kolb was. He's on a 2/15.5 deal (only $4 million guaranteed). It's just a low cost bridge QB that won't hurt your team while having real potential to be more than that.

I don't see much of a market for Flynn, but I do think a few smart teams will look at Flynn and his contract and think he's worth it. The draft pick won't be stellar, but the draft pick is just a bonus. If Seattle unloads Flynn for a round 4-7 pick, I'd say it a win for Seattle and a big win for whoever the buyer is. Seattle got a draft pick for Tarvaris Jackson. They got two picks for Aaron Curry. Flynn is far more valuable than either one- so I don't think Seattle would have much trouble finding a buyer, especially in a year where hunger at QB looks as intense as ever.

Last edited by kearly on Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:48 pm, edited 6 times in total.

Erebus wrote:I don't really buy the argument that nobody would want Flynn because nobody wanted him last year. By my count, there are currently 7 teams that could use a new QB this offseason (and only 3 projected 1st round pick QBs). They are the Jets, Bills, Jaguars, Chiefs, Raiders, Vikings, and Cardinals. None of them were in the market for a QB last year (either due to financial commitments or having a rookie QB who needed more time to evaluate), so there's no way to know if they all would've passed on Flynn.

The teams that did need a new QB last year all got one. There were really only two other suitors for Flynn's services besides the Seahawks, and those were the Dolphins and Browns. And they both opted to draft a 1st round QB instead. Not every team this year can do that. I think there will be a market for him, and its not franchise-crippling to take on his contract for a 4th round pick. There will be desperate teams out there.

I agree with this. But I'd lower the pick value to a 5th or 6th. A 4 would be a huge win. Who knows? Maybe we can find a super desperate rookie GM to fleece like San Diego was able to do with JS his first year?

But more likely than not the team will act as if taking on the contract is a burden, whether it is on not. There will be a perceived notion that Seattle wants to get rid of Flynn because it won't want an expensive backup now that it knows what it has in Wilson. If I'm a GM negotiating with Seattle, I'm going in with the opinion that I'm doing the Hawks a favor in taking off the league's most expensive backup off their hands. Not saying this is the case. But that's how I'd approach talks.

And while I do think there could be a team or two interested in giving up a mid-round pick for Flynn. I still think the new trend of drafting and playing young players is not to be ignored. The trend has existed for a couple years now. But in the face of RG3, Luck, and Wilson, it's going to grow even more so. The NFL is a copycat league. After the year of the rookie qb, nobody is trying to copycat KC or Arizona. If Flynn in in fact traded, I'd put money on his new team also drafting a qb semi-early on. Similar to what Seattle did this year with Wilson in rd 3.

Last edited by SeaTown81 on Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kearly wrote:Funny enough, I think there could be some real potential for an in division trade. Arizona is desperate at QB and might be picking too low to get one of the 3 first round QB options. SF will want to dump Alex Smith and Seattle will want to unload Flynn. I think both teams wouldn't mind dealing to Arizona, because although it would make Arizona a much better team, it would prevent them from being bad enough to get the next Luck/RG3 megastar in the draft for half a decade or more (unless they are smart enough to draft Johnny Manziel in the 3rd round of the 2016 draft, but if Arizona did something smart after the early rounds, it would be a first).

Excellent point on preventing Zona from getting a future ringer. If I were Zona, I'd do both... and I'd do it now. I'd trade, cut, whatever I had to do with all of their QBs. Maybe get a few late rd picks for the bunch. I'd work a deal for Flynn or Smith. Both, IMO, are solid QBs. Then I'd trade down in the first and pick up a nother late rd pick. I'd then use my first on Tyler Wilson to be groomed behind Flynn / Smith. One thing they know they have is time. They are not going to unseat us or SF anytime soon. No better time than now to start developing players while still fielding a respectable team (that will keep fan interest). Barkley, IMO, will be there late as well, But after Lienert, do they really want to put their necks out for another Trojan? Sounds like a PR nitemare to me.

Superman509 wrote:I love your break down of the of the cap implications. It makes total sense, the only thing I would disagree with would be the expandability of Miller. He does so many things for us in the run game that don't show up on the stat sheet. I would hate to see him leave.

To be clear, I don't want to mess with Miller's contract either. That was kind of my point- the most obvious contract for restructure is a good player, and good players are usually left alone. Miller isn't worth his $11 million cap hit next year, but releasing him saves only $7 million, and to replace Miller with a decent option you are probably looking at paying at least that much, so Seattle should only cut Miller if they are desperate.

Hence, it makes trading Flynn a very real option as our salary cap savior this season (releasing is an option too, but I think it's very likely that a few teams would happily take his contract off our hands for a late pick).

HawkWow wrote:IMO, will be there late as well, But after Lienert, do they really want to put their necks out for another Trojan? Sounds like a PR nitemare to me.

A few months ago I was hopeful that Barkley could slide, but I think it's very obvious now that he won't. You have teams all over league tripping over themselves to copy Indy's Curtis Painter tactic from 2011. The Jets purposely not starting Tim Tebow in favor of future CFL player Greg McElroy. Arizona starting Lindley and Hoyer. The Bills GM openly admitting that he will trade up for a QB in the upcoming draft. The Raiders are thinking of turning to Terrelle Pryor (although he might actually be an upgrade over Matt Leinart).

And who are those teams so desperate to tank for? I doubt it's Tyler Wilson, who's this year's Ryan Tannehill (at best). I doubt it's for Geno Smith, who has some ability but has very much cooled off after a hot start. It has to be for Barkley. Let's not forget that many people considered Barkley 1B to Andrew Luck's 1A before this season, and Barkley's white hot finish in 2011 was the reason for USC's pre-season #1 ranking.

Barkley will go #1, or at the very worst, top 5. If KC picks #1, he will be a Chief. If Jacksonville picks #1, he'll either be a Jaguar or sold off to the highest bidder. Do NOT be shocked if we see a huge bidding war for Barkley's services. He will likely be the consensus #1 QB and teams are as hungry as ever for rookie QBs hoping to channel the same success as the 2012 group.

Superman509 wrote:I love your break down of the of the cap implications. It makes total sense, the only thing I would disagree with would be the expandability of Miller. He does so many things for us in the run game that don't show up on the stat sheet. I would hate to see him leave.

To be clear, I don't want to mess with Miller's contract either. That was kind of my point- the most obvious contract for restructure is a good player, and good players are usually left alone. Miller isn't worth his $11 million cap hit next year, but releasing him saves only $7 million, and to replace Miller with a decent option you are probably looking at paying at least that much, so Seattle should only cut Miller if they are desperate.

Hence, it makes trading Flynn a very real option as our salary cap savior this season (releasing is an option too, but I think it's very likely that a few teams would happily take his contract off our hands for a late pick).

Do you think we could ship him for a player that wants out? At this point I'd be happy to dump his salary and start looking at extending our own players. I'm wondering if they re negotiate with Miller and give him more money up front n order to push his cap number down. I don't know how that works but I've seen things like that happen. I'd think cable would flip his lid if something were to happen to Miller.

When I get to the NFL, I'm gonna destroy the league, as soon as they give me the chance.' And that's what I've been doing ever since - Richard Sherman

I don't understand why people on here tend to devalue the trade value of a starting Quarterback when history demonstrates otherwise. We gave up a 3rd and moved way back in the 2nd for a piece of "scrap" QB.

Kansas City gave up a 2nd rounder for Matt Cassell and took on a monstrous contract.

Chicago gave up a 1st rounder for Jay Cutler.

Houston gave up a 2nd round pick for Matt Schaub (IIRC).

I won't mention Oakland's Palmer deal because nobody alive is that stupid

Arizona gave up a top-flight DB and a 2nd round pick was it for Kolb?

And look at the risk teams have taken by using 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks on all sort of QBs. I don't think Osweiler will ever make it in the NFL. He will probably be "okay," but that doesn't win championships.

And there are a lot of desperate teams that thought they were set at quarterback going in to 2012, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Kansas City, Buffalo, Cleveland, Oakland, Eagles, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, Arizona, and maybe even San Francisco.

If nothing else, all of these teams need to invest in a good backup in case their QBOTF plays like he did in 2012.

So I don't think it's too far fetched to get a 2nd or high 3rd rounder for Matt Flynn, and swapping spots in the 1st is a real possibility imho. Hell, we gave up a 1st for a wide receiver! Don't forget that a QB from a successful team has added value. Matt Cassell going 11-5 in Cincinnati wouldn't have earned them a 2nd round pick like New England got. Much of a player's value depends on the team that they play for. Other teams want that experience, they want some of that mojo.

We shall see though. A lot depends on who keeps their job and who doesn't. I expect that Romeo Crennel will keep his job but he will be on a short leash. So he won't want to risk his career on a rookie QB. But then again, KC might be gunshy about trading for someone else's QB. If that's the case, I could see Buffalo or Minnesota being interested in a new QB.

No team in this league can win without a decent QB. Teams that will need a QB in 2013:Kansas CitySan Diego should cut Rivers. I think he is really a back up now.Tampa Bay might look for a QB. Freeman needs to be seriously challenged. He hasn't progressed, although he doesn't have competitionBuffallo needs a QB. I don't think what they have now is the answer. Minnesota needs a QB.Philly will need a QB. I don't think Foles is the answer, if they want to compete soon. Jets ... for obvious reasonsJacksonville will sign TebowCardinals need a QB ... Cleveland is also looking at a QB. Weeden is not their answer ...I think the market for Flynn is out there. We can get good value for him.

You won't find out where the market is till all the coaches and GM's get fired next week. Typically they will bring on guys that will then want to fit guys in that can play in there systems. Young and Vick as mobile guys Foles proved he can play in my opinion. You also will have guys like McCoy maybe on the market along with Smith.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

joeseahawks wrote:No team in this league can win without a decent QB. Teams that will need a QB in 2013:Kansas CitySan Diego should cut Rivers. I think he is really a back up now.Tampa Bay might look for a QB. Freeman needs to be seriously challenged. He hasn't progressed, although he doesn't have competitionBuffallo needs a QB. I don't think what they have now is the answer. Minnesota needs a QB.Philly will need a QB. I don't think Foles is the answer, if they want to compete soon. Jets ... for obvious reasonsJacksonville will sign TebowCardinals need a QB ... Cleveland is also looking at a QB. Weeden is not their answer ...I think the market for Flynn is out there. We can get good value for him.

Clevelands not looking for a QB, Weeden has had kind of a rough first season, but he's isn't at all bad. Jacksonville needs a QB badly too, Tebow isn't the future of anything and neither is Gabbert or Henne.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:I don't see who's going to jump for Flynn. There were three or four QB-desperate teams last March and none of them gave more than a half-hearted offer. He'll probably just get cut.

Agreed. I think we'll cut him unless a team offers a late round pick. And the Seahawks will be free then to add a QB with comparable physical skills to Wilson so they don't have to dramatically switch their game plan if the starter gets injured.

And there's never great demand for a physically mediocre QB approaching 30, earning $7-8m for a season who has to date been a career backup. If you think a team is going to offer much for that, it's wishful thinking. The market was cold for a reason last year. The fact a few others teams are also in need 12 months on means little. Are Kansas City going to jump from Cassel/Quinn to Matt Flynn? Good luck selling that to the fans in KC.

Again I completely disagree with those of you that think Flynn will be traded or released.

You all ignore the FACTS of Wilson being in his rookie contract for at least 3 years we are probably paying less for our 2 QBs than most teams. And why would we trade away a better than decent backup when we have no other in sight and maybe have a chance at a Super Bowl?

Use you heads,,,there is no upside for the Seahawks to trade/release Flynn in any of the scenerios you mention.

Again I'm going to wager he is going no where for at least 2 more seasons. Why? Cause the team can't negotiate a new contract for Wilson until he has played 3 years of his rookie contract. By then, Flynn might very well be to old for any trade value and his best money options would be stay here for the rest of his career.

He can make $3 million a year and hopefully not get his uniform dirty. Not a Super Bowl but damned sure better than most backup QBs can expect.

I think some of you just are never completely happy and have to think up outragous things for something to do.